The Twitter Saga Continues

In understanding any of what was going on at Twitter, it is a good idea to refer to a series of articles posted at The Conservative Treehouse describing Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop. The basic premise of the articles about Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop is that the business model for Twitter does not work unless various agencies prop it up. Twitter is the the U.S. government as Tik Tok is to the Chinese Communist government.

On Sunday, Breitbart posted an article about some of the things we have recently learned about the collaboration between Twitter and various government agencies.

The article reports:

The CIA was among a number of security state agencies, including the State Department and the Pentagon, involved in censorship at Twitter, according to the ninth tranche of Twitter Files released by Elon Musk, via journalist Matt Taibbi.

Following the bizarre statement released by the FBI, calling the Twitter Files reporting “misinformation” spread by “conspiracy theorists” with the “sole purpose of discrediting the agency,” Taibbi posted a new tranche revealing much more widespread government involvement in censorship than previously known — adding, “Why stop with one [agency]?”

The ninth release of Twitter Files displays aggressive efforts by the CIA and other agencies in the security state to force Twitter’s hand in censoring various political opinions and speech, through constant contact with the company’s executives, one of whom Taibbi reveals is ex-CIA himself.

Taibbi writes that the FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter, describing the bureau as a “doorman” for the other agencies to connect with Twitter.

“The files show the FBI acting as doorman to a vast program of social media surveillance and censorship,” Taibbi writes, “encompassing agencies across the federal government – from the State Department to the Pentagon to the CIA.”

The article concludes:

Taibbi explains how the government would push Twitter according to its theories about “foreign influence” that Twitter did not see borne out in its own data. Twitter would respond to the government’s “constant pressure” that there was no evidence for their assertions, however, Twitter still surrendered its independence.

“The #TwitterFiles show execs under constant pressure to validate theories of foreign influence – and unable to find evidence for key assertions,” Taibbi writes, providing a number of examples.

“‘Due to a lack of technical evidence on our end, I’ve generally left it be, waiting for more evidence,’ he says. ‘Our window on that is closing, given that government partners are becoming more aggressive on attribution’,” Taibbi reports, adding, “Translation: ‘more aggressive’ ‘government partners’ had closed Twitter’s ‘window’ of independence.”

The CIA did not respond for request for comment, Taibbi reports:

“The CIA has yet to comment on the nature of its relationship to tech companies like Twitter. Twitter had no input into anything I did or wrote. The searches were carried out by third parties, so what I saw could be limited.”

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. We are running out of conspiracy theories–they are all turning out to be true.

An Interesting Question

On Tuesday, The American Thinker posted an article asking an interesting question, “Why Did the FBI Want Joe Biden to Become President?”

Think about that question for a moment. They knew his history. They knew his foreign policy mistakes, his history of plagiarism, his history of lying, they had the laptop, so they knew about the influence peddling of Hunter and the questionable family business dealings. Why would they want someone like that to become President?

The article notes:

Just imagine for a moment that Donald Trump, Jr. (or Eric) sat on the board of directors for a foreign company and “earned” millions of dollars for literally doing nothing. He didn’t know the industry and didn’t speak the language. The only thing Junior brought to the table was his last name. He made deals with foreign agents and foreign corporations to acquire rare materials like cobalt (used in electric cars) that was sold to Chinese interests for profit. While on an extended drug binge, he took a computer with lots of incriminating evidence to a repair shop and forgot or didn’t care what he’d done with it. Then he ignored all the calls from the shop telling him to come pick up his computer. That would be huge news, wouldn’t it?

Of course, Donald Trump, Sr. would be crucified. The media coverage would be nonstop. After years of witch hunts, they would finally have legitimate criminal behavior to investigate. The thousands of hours of airtime devoted to fake scandals would finally have paid off.

But change the name from Donald Trump, Jr. to Hunter Biden and the political party that stands to suffer from the revelations from Republican to Democrat, and the media becomes curiously uninterested in doing their job, which is to report the truth: That Hunter Biden is the bagman for the Biden family crime syndicate. The latest Twitter Files information drop proves it. Not only has Hunter’s corrupt and criminal business deals been exposed, the extraordinary lengths to which the FBI acted to suppress a true story have been exposed, too. 

The FBI played a substantial role in the 2020 election:

Who or what authorized them, a federal agency, to spend my tax dollars on manipulating social media to deliberately advance a false narrative about Hunter’s laptop? It’s difficult to find the right words to describe the depths of their corruption that has now been exposed for the whole world to see, but I’m certainly going to try my best. “Unbelievable” isn’t a very good descriptor either, because we have tons of evidence that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the FBI took extraordinary measures to manipulate the 2020 election in favor of Joe Biden.

The article concludes:

Another question popped into my head: why was the FBI working so feverishly to get the Biden administration into the White House, when they had to know how horribly corrupt the whole family was? Remember they took possession of the evidence on Dec. 9, 2019.

The most obvious answer that comes to my mind is that the administration, particularly the intelligence community, knew he was the candidate they could control. Conservatives left and right are being arrested and prosecuted for ridiculous reasons, crimes against conservatives aren’t being investigated, and the truth is being filtered and distorted to the point that it is unrecognizable. We’ve long suspected FBI corruption, and now we have irrefutable proof that it has been happening and continues to happen. It was to preserve their power at all costs. Perhaps the only truth Chuck Schumer ever told was when he famously warned Trump that the intelligence community had “six ways from Sunday” to come after him, and would do so, to protect its fiefdom.

This leads one to an obvious conclusion: the FBI has become the American Stasi. As of today, I have become very distrustful and afraid of my own government. I halfway expect my house to be raided and my own arrest coming for the crime of speaking truth to power.

Only one word accurately describes the crime the FBI has committed, and that word is treason.

May the punishment fit the crime.

President Trump represents a threat to the status quo. A lot of the status quo has been revealed through the released Twitter files, but I suspect that is simply the tip of the iceberg. The FBI is simply protecting their own corruption. How long are Americans going to allow that?

Taxpayer Dollars At Work

On Monday, Trending Politics reported that the FBI paid Twitter $3.4 million dollars of taxpayer money for their “staff time.” That alone ought to be enough to fire everyone at the senior levels of the FBI and the DOJ.

The article includes the following screenshot:

When I have written about Twitter, I have continually referred to The Conservative Treehouse’s April 2022 article about Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop. The basic premise of the article is that unless Twitter is to the Department of Justice and FBI what Tik Tok is to the Communist government of China, it’s business model does not make sense. This drop of Twitter files illustrates that point. It is frightening to me that taxpayer money is being used for obviously partisan political purposes.

The article at Trending Politics also includes the following:

Michael Shellenberger

Replying to @ShellenbergerMD

14. Were the FBI warnings of a Russian hack-and-leak operation relating to Hunter Biden based on *any* new intel? No, they weren’t “Through our investigations, we did not see any similar competing intrusions to what had happened in 2016,” admitted FBI agent Elvis Chan in Nov.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Michael Shellenberger
@ShellenbergerMD

Follow

15. Indeed, Twitter executives *repeatedly* reported very little Russian activity. E.g., on Sept 24, 2020, Twitter told FBI it had removed 345 “largely inactive” accounts “linked to previous coordinated Russian hacking attempts.” They “had little reach & low follower accounts.”
It’s time to dissolve the FBI and the DOJ and start from scratch.

Knowing Who The Players Are


On Tuesday, The U.K. Daily Mail posted an article about Elon Musk’s firing of Twitter’s general counsel James A. Baker.

The article reports:

Chief Twit Elon Musk has fired Twitter’s general counsel James A. Baker, citing his alleged involvement in suppressing the release of internal documents regarding Twitter’s censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.

‘In light of concerns about Baker’s possible role in suppression of information important to the public dialogue, he was exited from Twitter today,’ Musk wrote in a tweet on Tuesday.

Musk added that Baker’s explanation of the events surrounding the laptop saga was ‘unconvincing.’ 

Journalist Matt Taibbi, who released the first batch of internal files about the Hunter saga on Friday, claimed that Baker had been fired in part for ‘vetting the first batch of ‘Twitter Files” – without knowledge of new management.’ 

The article notes some of the previous work of James Baker:

Before joining Twitter, Baker was former FBI general counsel under Director James Comey, and played a key role in the saga surrounding the Bureau’s controversial probe into possible collusion between Russia and Donald Trump‘s 2016 campaign. 

The article also notes:

James Baker has long been in the crosshairs of Elon Musk, who on October 27 became his boss.

Baker played a key role in a series of events that led to Democrat lawyer Michael Sussmann going on trial in May, accused of lying to the FBI.

He was not accused of giving the FBI false information, but rather lying about who he worked for.

The saga began when Sussmann was given information from a group of data scientists who analyzed odd internet data they thought might suggest clandestine communications between a server for the Trump Organization and a server for Alfa Bank, a Kremlin-linked Russian financial institution.

Sussmann then texted Baker, at the time the bureau’s general counsel, to say he had information the FBI should be aware of.

‘I’m coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the bureau,’ Sussmann wrote in his text to Baker.

Baker testified that he was certain Sussmann was acting as an individual, and would likely not have met him were he working for the Clinton campaign.

Sussmann, a cybersecurity specialist, had worked for the Democratic Party in the context of Russia’s hacking of its servers, and Russia publishing emails from the servers.

Sussmann was also connected to the Democrats via one of his partners at the law firm Perkins Coie, Marc Elias, who was representing the Clinton campaign and hired Fusion GPS.

Yet multiple people – including Elias – testified that Sussmann was indeed acting on his own accord, and argued that actually going to the FBI was not in the interests of the Clinton campaign, which would have preferred a New York Times story drawing attention to the assertions.

The FBI later decided the allegations of links between the Trump campaign and the Russian bank were unfounded.

Musk tweeted during the trial that he thought Sussmann had ‘created an elaborate hoax’ about Russia, in a bid to help Clinton.

I wonder if Elon Musk understood how much housecleaning needed to be done when he bought Twitter.

The Threat Of Disinformation

On Sunday, The Wall Street Journal posted an article about Elon Musk’s release of Twitter’s documents showing censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story.

The article reports:

Elon Musk’s release of internal emails relating to Twitter’s 2020 censorship is news by any definition, even if the mainstream media dismiss it. There will be many threads to unspool as more is released, but a couple of points are already worth making.

The first is that Mr. Musk would do the country a favor by releasing the documents all at once for everyone to inspect. So far he’s dribbled them out piecemeal through journalist Matt Taibbi’s Twitter feed, which makes it easier for the media to claim they can’t report on documents because they can’t independently confirm them.

A second point is an huzzah for Rep. Ro Khanna, the California progressive Democrat, who warned Twitter in 2020 about the free-speech implications and political backlash of censoring the New York Post story about Hunter Biden’s laptop. That was good advice, even if Twitter didn’t take it.

A third point is the confirmation of the central role that former spies played in October 2020 in framing the Hunter Biden story in a way that made it easier for Twitter and Facebook to justify their censorship.

Recall that former Democratic intelligence officials James Clapper and John Brennan led the spooks in issuing a public statement suggesting that the laptop may have been hacked and its content was Russian disinformation. On Oct. 16, 2020, Mr. Clapper told CNN that “to me, this is just classic textbook Soviet Russian tradecraft at work.” On Oct. 19, 51 former spooks released their statement claiming that the arrival of the emails “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” (The statement and signers are published nearby.)

The article at the Wall Street Journal concludes:

The partisan foray by current and former U.S. intelligence officials in the last two elections should be deeply troubling to Americans on the left and right. They have authority by dint of access to information that isn’t confirmable by the press, which takes their spin as gospel. This is a form of political corruption that needs to be exposed, and perhaps the Twitter documents will help to unlock the story.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It is very possible that the former and current U.S. intelligence officials working to get Joe Biden elected didn’t want President Trump looking into the domestic activities of our spy agencies. It seems that a thorough examination of those domestic activities is long overdue.

 

What Difference Did It Make?

We are getting a lot of information right now about the censorship operation that Twitter was operating in order to protect the Biden campaign during the 2020 election. The information is not really surprising to those of us who were paying attention, but some of this is actually news to many Americans. On Saturday, PJ Media posted an article about the probable consequences of Twitter’s censorship.

The article notes:

Let’s begin with the premise that suppressing the content of Hunter Biden’s laptop affected the outcome of the 2020 Election. The Media Research Center (MRC) conducted one of the only polls about how the information on the computer would have affected the way people voted. MRC’s analysis found that full awareness of the Hunter Biden scandal would have led 9.4% of Biden voters to abandon the Democratic candidate. This would have flipped all six of the swing states Biden won to Trump, giving the former President 311 electoral votes.

By that analysis, if not for the fateful decision to censor the laptop story, which Gadde and Baker had a hand in, at least five major things would be different.

The article then goes on to list five of the things that would be different:

First and foremost, it is almost certain there would not be a war in Ukraine right now. President Trump placed sanctions on the Nord 2 pipeline during his term, despite German objections. All Biden had to do was stand up to outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel. After all, the entire purpose of NATO is to protect the European continent from Russian aggression. Letting Germany and other western powers become dependent on Russian energy goes directly against the mission.

When the Biden administration inexplicably lifted the sanctions in May 2021, it green-lit the pipeline that would bypass Ukraine, depriving the former Soviet nation of transit revenues and making it more vulnerable to Russian aggression. Even Ukrainian President Voldymor Zelensky knew it.

…Next, the Ukrainian war led to Russia and China becoming closer allies and leading the BRIC nations. This group includes Brazil and India. Many believe these nations will be dominant suppliers of manufactured goods, services, and raw materials by 2050. There have been reports that BRIC nations and their allies want to replace the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. The Biden administration seems content to let this happen without a challenge. As the kleptocrats in our government, led by Joe Biden and Wall Street, lead us into managed decline, you can thank Gadde and Baker.

Third, our European allies would not be facing an energy crisis. The war in Ukraine needlessly destroyed Nord 1, which supplied much of the continent. Additionally, the Biden administration’s not-in-my-backyard energy policy leaves the U.S. unable to meet our own energy needs, let alone help Europe.

…The same NIMBY energy policy also makes the United States less safe. In a 2020 debate, Trump explained in about 10 seconds how U.S. energy independence strengthened our foreign policy. Now, Joe Biden begs some of the worst dictators in the world for oil, and they laugh at him. Biden also drains our strategic petroleum reserves to save Democrats from getting obliterated in the midterms, leaving us less prepared.

The article concludes:

Finally, as you struggle with inflation on food and gas, know that it never needed to happen. When Trump left office, the economy was recovering from the pandemic on a V-shaped trajectory. The American Rescue Plan, the infrastructure bill, and the Inflation Reduction Act blew more money into an economy overheated by pandemic relief. When the new administration allowed even more dollars to chase fewer goods, prices rose. So, when you are rolling your eyes over your grocery bill, thank Gadde and Baker. Their manipulation of Twitter helped Joe Biden do that.

The only constitutional solution to a stolen election is the next election. Please keep that in mind. For those of you that hate President Trump, remember the good he did for the average American. You may not like his style, but he accomplished more in four years than the past five presidents. In the interest of fairness and for the good of the country, he needs to be re-elected in 2024.

Misplaced Blame?

On Saturday, The Daily Wire posted the following headline:

Ex-Twitter Executive: Elon Musk Is Putting Us ‘In Harm’s Way’ By Showing How We Censored Content

So wait a minute; I’m just curious. When the FBI puts up a wanted poster, are they putting the person on that poster in harm’s way? So doing something illegal is not the problem, pointing it out is?

The article notes:

Twitter’s former head of trust and safety claimed Friday night that Twitter CEO Elon Musk was putting people’s lives in danger by revealing internal company documents showing how employees censored conservatives and a negative news story about then-presidential candidate Joe Biden’s son.

Yoel Roth, Twitter’s former Sr. Director, Head of Trust & Safety, complained about Musk’s decision to release internal company communications through journalist Matt Taibbi about the company’s censorship of the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story during the 2020 presidential election.

…“Publicly posting the names and identities of front-line employees involved in content moderation puts them in harm’s way and is a fundamentally unacceptable thing to do,” Roth posted on Mastodon.

Publicly posting the names and identities of those who broke the law might actually prevent others from breaking the law, but I guess Mr. Roth doesn’t see it that way.

James Woods was one of the people impacted by the censorship. He appeared on Tucker Carlson last week.

The article reports his comments:

Woods joined Fox News host Tucker Carlson as Taibbi was releasing the internal information from Twitter.

“I’ve been a target of these people for six years. They have destroyed my career,” Woods said. “They have destroyed my livelihood. They’ve destroyed my faith in this country that my family has defended in the military since the Revolutionary War.”

“I can guarantee you one thing, more than anything else you’ll ever hear in your life, I will be getting a lawyer. I will be suing the Democratic National Committee. No matter what, whether I win or lose, I am going to stand up for the rights of every American,” he said. “I’m not a celebrity, I’m hardly recognizable anymore because my career has been destroyed by these very people.”

This is not acceptable behavior in a supposedly-free nation.

The Dangers Of Biased Social Media

I am writing this article as someone who has been routinely ‘shadow banned’ on Facebook, fact checked incorrectly, and restricted. Some of our social media has decided that they are the sole arbiters of what is truth and they are not open to opposing viewpoints. This is dangerous to a society that supposedly embraces free speech.

Yesterday, Townhall reported that Elon Musk has confirmed that Twitter did interfere in the 2020 election.

The article reports:

Newly minted Twitter CEO and owner Elon Musk revealed Wednesday that under previously leadership, the social media giant did in fact interfere in elections. Musk promised “Twitter 2.0” will change course and operate transparently on the issue. 

…Most infamously, Twitter banned any mention of Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell” in the lead up to the 2020 presidential election. By default, they also censored Joe Biden’s deep involvement and shady business dealings with foreign adversaries. 

At the time platform executives, including then CEO Jack Dorsey, justified the multi-month banning of the account belonging to the New York Post — the nation’s oldest paper — whose reporters broke the laptop story in October 2020. They also banned White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany after she shared the story, along with countless others who did the same. 

During testimony on Capitol Hill in 2021, Dorsey admitted the social media platform had no factual basis for censoring the story. 

The article notes that a recent poll showed a significant number of voters would not have cast their ballots for Biden if they had known about the contents of the laptop.

The article includes the following quote:

Nearly four of five Americans who’ve been following the Hunter Biden laptop scandal believe that “truthful” coverage would have changed the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, according to a new poll.

A similar percentage also said they’re convinced that information on the computer is real, with just 11% saying they thought it was “created by Russia,” according to the survey conducted by the New Jersey-based Technometrica Institute of Policy and Politics.

And an even higher number — 81% — said US Attorney General Merrick Garland should appoint a special counsel to investigate matters related to the first son’s infamous laptop, the existence of which was exclusively revealed by The Post in October 2020.

Actually, Twitter is not entirely to blame. What about Americans who didn’t bother to do their own research but instead depended strictly on the mainstream media? We cannot maintain our republic without informed voters. We need more voters willing to be informed.

A Victory For Freedom Of Speech

Having been routinely shadow banned on Facebook (there is a Right Wing Granny group on Facebook, please join), I appreciate the fact that Texas is fighting the censorship that Big Tech has imposed on conservatives in recent years. It seems that there may be an end to that censorship. As I write this, a friend’s post has been thoroughly blacked out because Facebook didn’t think anyone should be allowed to see it.

On Tuesday, Fox News reported the following:

A federal appeals court upheld a Texas law on Friday that seeks to curb censorship by social media platforms. The ruling, a major victory for Republicans who charge companies like Twitter and Facebook are limiting free speech, is a step in a major legal battle that could end up at the Supreme Court.

The lawsuit is challenging HB 20, a Texas bill signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott that regulates social media platforms with more than 50 million monthly users, which includes Google, Facebook and Twitter, and says they cannot censor or limit users’ speech based on viewpoint expression. 

In his opinion, Federal Judge Andrew S. Oldham of the Fifth Circuit said the platforms argued for “a rather odd inversion of the First Amendment” that “buried somewhere in the person’s enumerated right to free speech lies a corporation’s unenumerated right to muzzle speech.”

“Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say,” Judge Oldham continued.

The article notes:

Friday’s ruling created what is known as a “circuit split,” since the eleventh circuit struck down a similar social media law in Florida. A circuit split generally increases the likelihood of the Supreme Court taking up a case.

It will be interesting to see if the Supreme Court will take the case and what their ruling will be. It is also interesting to see if this case settled  before the mid-term election.

Investigating Social Media Censorship

On July 14th, The Conservative Review posted an article about the ongoing battle between Twitter and free speech. For a real analysis of exactly who and what Twitter is, please read this article from The Conservative Treehouse.

The article at The Conservative Review reports:

Can Congress pass a law requiring that all platforms of speech censor any negative comment about Pfizer? “Well, of course not,” you will say, “it violates the First Amendment.” In that case, why should it be different when the executive branch works intimately with government-created and liability-protected monopolies to zap anyone’s Twitter account who is critical of Pfizer and its magical products? That is not free market or private enterprise; it is the worst form of fascism, and now a new federal court ruling might bring this point to life.

On Tuesday, a federal judge in Louisiana granted the request from the Louisiana and Missouri attorneys general for discovery to collect documents linking the Biden administration to social media censorship. Thanks to this important order, we might be able to discover the scope of collaboration between government and Twitter and Facebook to censor stories (and people) pertaining to the Hunter Biden laptop story, the origins of COVID-19, the efficacy of masks and lockdowns, and election integrity.

On May 5, Missouri AG Eric Schmitt and Louisiana AG Jeff Landry filed a First Amendment complaint against the Biden administration in the Western District of Louisiana alleging that the administration violated the Free Speech Clause by working with the tech giants to label all dissenting viewpoints on the aforementioned issues as “misinformation.” They alleged that this effort is being led by a “Disinformation Governance Board” (“DGB”) within the Department of Homeland Security.

The article concludes:

While the legal dispute plays out in court, it’s time for conservatives in the legislatures to hit back at the RINO governors for continuing to act as if anything COVID-related – be it a vaccine or mask mandate – is somehow coming from the private sector. The government mandated it for some, censored opposing viewpoints, absolved pharma of liability, paid for the product, distributed it, and marketed it. The notion that private actors endorsing these policies is an exercise in free-market capitalism is absurd. It is the responsibility of the state to interpose against such tyranny by banning companies from joining in with the federal policies.

We saw this done very effectively when the Florida Department of Health recommended against the baby shots and refused to distribute them. Publix actually decided on its own to follow the guidance of Florida rather than the federal government. It demonstrates that so much of this enforcement in the private sector is being done with the federal boot on companies’ necks. Those Republicans who hide behind affinity for the “private” sector and free markets to allow federal tyranny, censorship, and persecution to continue are complicit in the worst form of fascism.
The fact that private monopolies get roped into government fascism doesn’t ameliorate the pig; it makes it even more dangerous.

As I write this, I am restricted on Facebook because of posting articles about the effectiveness of the Covid vaccine and the health problems people have experienced as a result of the vaccine. I believe this information should be easily accessible to the public, but evidently Facebook does not. I am not telling people to avoid social media, but I strongly suggest that you find sources other than Facebook and Twitter for your news if you want to get all of the news.

Supporting Harassment Of People You Disagree With

There are a lot of Americans lamenting the lack of civility in our current political debate. However, many of those same Americans are not willing to look at some of the roots of that incivility.

On Saturday, The New York Post reported the following:

A left-wing activist group is offering $50 to anyone who gives them the location of the six Supreme Court justices who voted last month to overturn Roe v. Wade.

ShutDownDC said it would pay the bounty to anyone who shares a “confirmed sighting” of Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett or John Roberts.

The group will pay a whopping $200 if the justice was still in the location where they were sighted after 30 minutes, according to a Friday tweet.

This is not acceptable behavior, but I haven’t heard a lot of voices calling them out. The article includes a Tweet advertising that they will pay for a sighting of one of the conservative justices. Where are the voices calling for civility in American politics?

The article notes:

Twitter prohibits users from encouraging or calling on others to harass an individual or group of people, according to its rules and policies document. The platform hasn’t yet commented on why the bounties don’t violate its rules, Fox News reported.

ShutDownDC’s public bounty offer came after protesters affiliated with the group targeted Kavanaugh while he dined at a Morton’s steakhouse in Washington DC Wednesday evening. Kavanaugh was ultimately forced to flee the eatery through a back door.

This is a new low in American politics and needs to be discouraged strongly. This is harassment of people with opposing views. What we need is honest debate–not harassment.

 

Popularity On Twitter

Popularity on social media is a bit questionable at best. It’s like sitting at an imaginary ‘cool kids’ table in high school–and I do mean imaginary. However, there are those who use the number of followers on Twitter as a gauge of something. What, I don’t know, but something. At any rate, the question is, “How many people on Twitter are actually real people?”

Breitbart posted an article on Wednesday reporting that nearly half of President Joe Biden’s 22.3 million Twitter followers are fake accounts. One wonders who set up these fake accounts and why they were set up.

The article reports:

Software company SparkToro found that 49.3 percent of accounts following the official @POTUS Twitter account are “fake followers” or inauthentic accounts known as bots, according to a report by Newsweek.

The same analysis reportedly also found that more than 14 million accounts that follow Biden’s personal @JoeBiden Twitter account are either fake or insufficiently active. Therefore, a crackdown on fake Twitter accounts could see users like Biden lose a huge number of followers.

SparkToro reportedly defines fake followers as “accounts that are unreachable and will not see the account’s tweets (either because they’re spam, bots, propaganda, etc. or because they’re no longer active on Twitter).”

The news of Biden’s fake Twitter followers comes after Tesla founder Elon Musk, who is currently trying to buy Twitter, expressed concerns about the number of bots on the social media platform.

Musk has since announced that his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter cannot move forward until the number of bot accounts on the platform is independently confirmed.

The SpaceX CEO tweeted that his offer was based on “Twitter’s SEC filings being accurate,” and he believes bots could account for 20 percent of the platform “or *much* higher.”

All of this has come to light because of Elon Musk’s plan to purchase Twitter. The article at Breitbart notes that uncovering these numbers may actually be part of Elon Musk’s negotiation process to acquire Twitter. Knowing that Elon Musk is a successful businessman who knows how to negotiate, that is entirely possible.

How Short Is The Average American’s Memory?

Disinformation is something the Biden administration wants to fight against. However, they seem to be spreading it themselves. On Thursday, The Daily Caller posted an article about some recent disinformation put out by the current White House.

The article reports:

The White House tweeted COVID-19 disinformation Thursday evening to imply that President Joe Biden deserves credit for vaccinating Americans against the virus.

The official White House twitter account tweeted that when Biden took office, on Jan. 20, 2021, there were millions of Americans unemployed and no COVID-19 vaccines available. The tweet went on to tout the decrease in unemployment since then, calling it the fastest drop in unemployment at the start of a president’s term ever.

…Biden himself had already received two doses of the coronavirus vaccine before he became president. He received his first dose of Pfizer’s vaccine Dec. 21, 2020, and then his second dose on Jan. 13, 2021.

Maybe he forgot.

On Saturday, Townhall reported that the misinformation had been corrected.

Townhall reported:

On Thursday night, as Katie highlighted, the official White House Twitter account, tweeted out a falsehood about the timeline of the availability of the vaccines. Though it has since been corrected, the original tweet in question is still up. 

…Glenn Kessler, the fact-checker for The Washington Post, also weighed in, demanding to know who was manning the account and calling for them to “Delete this false tweet.”

The job growth claims in the tweet are also questionable. Adding back jobs that you killed with the shutdown of the economy does not count as economic growth–it counts as recovery. This is really not the time for the Biden administration to be praising itself for its economic achievements–inflation has wiped out the salary gains Americans achieved during the Trump administration and food shortages and other supply chain issues have become a problem. I think the Biden administration needs to spend less time bragging and more time actually finding solutions to the problems they have created.

The Fight For Free Speech Continues

On Wednesday, The Daily Wire reported that the U.S. government has opened an investigation into Elon Musk’s business dealings.

The article reports:

“The Securities and Exchange Commission is probing Mr. Musk’s tardy submission of a public form that investors must file when they buy more than 5% of a company’s shares,” The Wall Street Journal reported. “The disclosure functions as an early sign to shareholders and companies that a significant investor could seek to control or influence a company.”

The report said that Musk’s April 4 disclosure filing was at least 10 days late, a move that is believed to have saved him more than $140 million because share prices could have been higher if the public knew about his ownership of 5% of the company.

“The case is easy. It’s straightforward,” Daniel Taylor, a University of Pennsylvania accounting professor, said. “But whether they’re going to pick that battle with Elon is another question.”

The report noted that a lawsuit against Musk from the SEC would likely not stop him from taking over Twitter since the company’s board of director’s unanimously approved to be acquired by Musk and the SEC may lack the power to do so. Musk’s purchase of Twitter is also reportedly being reviewed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Elon Musk has also stated that he would reinstate the account of President Trump.

The article notes his comments on the banning of President Trump:

“I think that was a mistake because it alienated a large part of the county, and did not ultimately result in Donald Trump not having a voice,” Musk said, adding that the decision was “morally bad.”

“That doesn’t mean that someone gets to say whatever they want to say,” Musk said. “If they say something that is illegal or destructive to the world, then there should be perhaps a timeout, temporary suspension or that particular tweet should be made invisible or have very little traction.”

“I would reverse the permanent ban,” Musk added.

Musk indicated that action could be taken against an account if there were tweets that violated platform policy, which he said “should be either deleted or made invisible, and a suspension—a temporary suspension—is appropriate, but not a permanent ban.”

Musk said that permanent bans “should be extremely rare and really reserved for accounts that are bots, or scam, spam accounts.”

President Trump has stated that he would not return to Twitter but focus on his own social media site, Truth Social.

Stay tuned.

Blocking Free Speech

A politically neutral Twitter is a threat to Democrat success at the voting booth. If people had been allowed to know more about Hunter Biden’s laptop, it might have changed their votes. There are still some people who because of their primary news sources don’t know about the information on Hunter Biden’s laptop or the efforts to suppress the news about the laptop. That is not healthy for our Republic. There will be a fight to prevent Elon Musk from turning Twitter into a free speech platform because that is a threat to the Democrats’ monopoly on the American media.

Fox News reported Wednesday on a letter sent from Representative Jim Jordan to Federal Trade Commission chief Lina Khan regarding the sale of Twitter.

The article reports:

“The day after Twitter’s board of directors agreed to sell Twitter to Mr. Elon Musk, the Open Markets Institute (OMI), an extreme left-wing political advocacy organization, called on Biden regulators at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the Justice Department to ‘block’ the purchase,” Jordan, R-Ohio, wrote in a letter sent to Khan on Wednesday and obtained by FOX Business

“We are concerned that OMI – where you were previously employed as Legal Director – may be trying to leverage its close relationship with you to take action to further limit free speech online,” Jordan told Khan.

Open Markets Institute Director Barry Lynn issued a statement on April 26 saying the group believes Musk’s purchase of Twitter “poses a number of immediate and direct threats to American democracy and free speech.”

Lynn went on to say that Open Markets “believes the deal violates existing law,” and that the FCC, DOJ and FTC “have ample authority to block it.”

Jordan wrote in his letter to Khan that “OMI appears to believe that the FTC will be receptive to its cavalier effort to influence a federal agency that is run by its former employee.”

The article concludes:

Khan has a lengthy history of urging the federal government to go after Big Tech firms and regulate their power. After she became head of the FTC, tech behemoths Facebook and Amazon both asked that she be removed from any involvement in the agency’s antitrust litigation against the companies, alleging that she has a clear bias against them that is well documented.

I am not convinced that the people saying that Elon Musk buying Twitter is a threat to free speech actually understand what free speech is.

The Deep State Tries To Put Guardrails On Twitter

On Wednesday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about how the political left and the fourth branch of government are attempting to put guardrails on Twitter now that Twitter is threatening them with free speech.

The article reports:

I think we are now seeing the outlines of how the Fourth Branch of Government are planning to keep control over information, specifically public discussion on Big Tech platforms, even as Elon Musk moves to open the valves of information from the social media platform Twitter.

Previously the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) announced a new Dept of Homeland Security priority to combat disinformation {LINK} on technology platforms including social media.

Many eyebrows were raised as the announcement appeared to be an open admission that the U.S. government was going to control information by applying labels, that would align with allies in social media, who need a legal justification for censorship and content removal.

This CISA announcement was quickly followed by various government officials and agencies saying it was critical to combat Russian disinformation, as the events in Ukraine unfolded.  In essence, Ukraine was the justification for search engines like Google, DuckDuckGo, and social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube to begin targeting information and content that did not align with the official U.S. government narrative.

Previously those same methods were deployed by the U.S. government, specifically the CDC and FDA, toward COVID-19 and the vaccination program. All of this background aligns with the previous visibility of a public-private partnership between the bureaucracy of government, the U.S. intelligence agencies and U.S. social media.  That partnership now forms the very cornerstone of the DHS/CISA effort to control what information exists in the public space.  It is highly important that people understand what is happening.

In July of 2021 the first admission of the official agenda behind the public-private partnership was made public {Reuters Article}.

What we are seeing now is an extension of the government control mechanisms, combined with a severe reaction by all stakeholders to the latest development in the Twitter takeover.

For two years the control mechanisms around information have been cemented by govt and Big Tech.  Even the deployment of the linguistics around disinformation, misinformation and malinformation is all part of that collective effort.  The collaboration between the government and Big Tech is not a matter for debate, it is all easily referenced by their own admissions.   The current issue is how they are deploying the information controls.

The Daily Wire reported on Tuesday:

The European Union issued a warning to Elon Musk on Tuesday, telling him that he must comply with EU regulations on policing online content, or face severe penalties.

In an interview with the Financial Times Tuesday, EU Commissioner for the Internal Market Thierry Breton said that he was giving Musk a “reality check,” adding that Twitter must cooperate with the EU’s rules on content moderation, including the pending Digital Services Act. The prospective legislation would force large tech platforms to take more action to disclose and remove illegal content, including “hate speech,” as noted by The Guardian.

There are people in America and around the world that are afraid of free speech. We are going to have to be alert to make sure that those people are not successful in determining what Americans and people around the world are allowed to hear.

A New Future For Twitter


On Monday, NewsMax reported that Twitter is planning on accepting Elon Musk’s final offer for $43 billion to buy the company.

The article reports:

Twitter may announce the $54.20-per-share deal later Monday, once its board has met to recommend the transaction to Twitter shareholders, the sources said, adding it was still possible the deal could collapse at the last minute.

Musk, the world’s richest person according to Forbes, is negotiating to buy Twitter in a personal capacity and Tesla is not involved in the deal.

The article concludes:

The deal, if it happens, would come just four days after Musk unveiled a financing package to back the acquisition.

This led Twitter’s board to take his offer more seriously and many shareholders to ask the company not to let the opportunity for a deal slip away, Reuters reported on Sunday. Before Musk revealed the financing package, Twitter’s board was expected to reject the bid, sources had said.

The sale would represent an admission by Twitter that Agrawal is not making enough traction in making the company more profitable, despite being on track to meet ambitious financial goals the company set for 2023. Twitter’s shares were trading higher than Musk’s offer price as recently as November.

Musk unveiled his intention to buy Twitter on April 14 and take it private via a financing package comprised of equity and debt. Wall Street’s biggest lenders, except those advising Twitter, have all committed to provide debt financing.

Musk’s negotiating tactics — making one offer and sticking with it — resembles how another billionaire, Warren Buffett, negotiates acquisitions. Musk did not provide any financing details when he first disclosed his offer for Twitter, making the market skeptical about its prospects.

This could be very interesting. It would be nice to bring free speech back to Twitter. I am on Truth Social as rwg@Right Wing Granny. Truth Social is unfiltered and I wouldn’t use it as a reliable source, but it is a place where people can express their ideas and opinions freely. It would be nice if Twitter also became a place where free speech is welcomed.

UPDATE: The purchase is complete. The reaction of the political left is totally entertaining!

 

 

The Double Standard Among Us

The Daily Wire recently posted an article sharing some of their observations regarding the possible takeover of Twitter by Elon Musk.

The article reports:

When Elon Musk offered to buy Twitter and make it a private company, Twitter’s board of directors responded with a poison pill — and the legacy media responded with a poison pen.

Journalists have contended that Musk’s bid to loosen the social media platform’s speech restrictions represent a threat to the First Amendment, threaten to give billionaires too much control over the media, or even presage the fall of our republic into a totalitarian oligarchy. These unduly emotional responses reveal that the legacy media’s fear is not so much Musk as it is free speech — and losing their ability to create the national narrative.

It really is all about control.

The article notes:

CNN’s Brian Stelter seemed to criticize the capitalist system of private media ownership. “There is also a lot of folks out there saying it’s troubling enough that private companies control these key communication platforms around the world, maybe it’s even worse to have the world’s richest person trying to buy one and take it private,” he said on April 14. In the same vein, and on the same day, Business Insider ran a story titled “Elon Musk’s attempt to buy Twitter represents a chilling new threat: billionaire trolls taking over social media.”

But billionaire ownership of the media is hardly new. And judging by their position on the payroll, it seems not to leave journalists ill at ease. To take but a few examples:

Even CNN founder Ted Turner still has a net worth of $2.3 billion, after being “squeezed out” of his own company many years ago.

If billionaire status does not actually offend the journalistic Left, what does? Perhaps Musk’s political donations to some Republicans, including George W. Bush, Kevin McCarthy, Joni Ernst, Lindsey Graham, and Marco Rubio? Possibly, but many businessmen (including our former president) have donated to politicians of both parties — and self-described centrist Musk is no exception.

It’s okay to be a millionaire who owns a news outlet if you are a liberal. It’s required that if you are a corporation that you pay more in taxes unless you are a liberal (see Disney). The double standard lives among us.

Let The Games Begin

On April 14th, The New York Post reported that Elon Musk has launched a $41 billion bid to buy Twitter, saying the proposed deal is part of his plan to bring “free speech around the globe.”

Wow. I suspect a lot of Twitter employees are currently having a nervous breakdown.

The article continues:

Musk’s offer price of $54.20 per share, which comes just days after he rejected a seat on the social media company’s board, represents a 38% premium to Twitter’s April 1 close, the last trading day before the Tesla CEO’s more than 9% stake in the company was made public.

Twitter’s shares jumped 12% in premarket trading.

“I invested in Twitter as I believe in its potential to be the platform for free speech around the globe, and I believe free speech is a societal imperative for a functioning democracy,” Musk wrote in a letter to Twitter Chairman Bret Taylor.

“Since making my investment I now realize the company will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form. Twitter needs to be transformed as a private company.”

“My offer is my best and final offer and if it is not accepted, I would need to reconsider my position as a shareholder,” Musk said.

The article concludes:

“Free speech is essential to a functioning democracy. Do you believe Twitter rigorously adheres to this principle?” Musk asked users in a Twitter poll on March 28, in which over 70 percent of the 2 million voters responded “No.”

Musk — the richest person in the world with a fortune of more than $265 billion, according to Forbes — bought some 73.5 million shares of the company, worth an estimated $2.89 billion, according to an SEC filing. 

The massive purchase may have violated federal law, according to financial experts. After the billionaire filed his disclosure forms, Twitter’s share price skyrocketed 30 percent.

Marc Bain Rasella, a Twitter shareholder, sued Musk for not disclosing his stake in the social media company soon enough.

The richest man in the world is obviously very good at three-dimensional chess.

Better Late Than Never I Guess

Townhall posted an article on Thursday about a recent article in the New York Times.

The article at Townhall reports:

The New York Times is out with a story today about the ongoing Department of Justice investigation into Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings. Deep down in the text, the story confirms Hunter Biden’s laptop — full of salacious information and photos — is indeed authentic. 

“The Justice Department inquiry into the business dealings of the president’s son has remained active, with a grand jury seeking information about payments from around the world,” the New York Times reports. “People familiar with the investigation said prosecutors had examined emails between Mr. Biden, Mr. Archer and others about Burisma and other foreign business activity. Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation. In some of the emails, Mr. Biden displayed a familiarity with FARA, and a desire to avoid triggering it.”

The article at Townhall reminds us:

During the 2020 presidential election, the New York Post first reported on the laptop and its contents. As the oldest newspaper in the country, the New York Post was banned from Twitter for weeks after being accused of spreading “misinformation.”

This is the story that got the New York Post removed from Twitter as the story was described as “Russian disinformation”. The media spin was that the Russians made up the laptop contents to discredit candidate Joe Biden. Very few informed Americans who saw the New York Post story doubted its veracity, but it was suppressed so as not to have a negative impact on the Biden campaign for the presidency. The suppression of pertinent information is just one of many reasons that we have the most corrupt and ineffective President in American history currently residing in the White House.

When Common Core Math Comes To Congress

Yesterday Trending Politics posted an article about a recent Tweet by Senator Bernie Sanders.

The article reports:

Sanders tweeted: “2 senators cannot be allowed to defeat what 48 senators and 210 House members want. We must stand with the working families of our country. We must combat climate change. We must delay passing the Infrastructure Bill until we pass a strong Reconciliation Bill.”

But that’s the way our system is set up. The Senate is supposed to be the deliberative body and the House of Representatives is supposed to be more easily swayed by the trends of the moment. The Senate is there to protect America from any rash action taken by the House of Representatives. That system was somewhat diluted by the Seventeen Amendment, but traces of it remain in place.

The article notes a few Tweets in response to Senator Sanders’ Tweet:

“This is a pretty hilarious way of trying to say “48 senators should win a vote over 52 senators when it’s a bill I like.” That’s some pretty creative math,” said one Twitter user.

“It’s 52 senators defeating what 48 senators want,” said Nick Pappas. “You need Manchin & Sinema because all 50 senators on the GOP side reject your proposal outright. Get a majority in the chamber if your plan is so popular.”

“48 senators and 210 House members are, last I checked, a minority of both chambers,” said Dan McLaughlin.

“In other words, 52 senators are defeating what 48 senators want and 225 House members are defeating what 210 want,” tweeted Greg Price.

“I know math isn’t a big thing with socialists, but it’s at least 52 Senators rejecting your radical agenda. And 52 is a bigger number than 48.”

“Bernie’s policies are based on the idea that 25 states do not matter,” said Tim Pool.

Please follow the link above to read the article for more Twitter entertainment.

Meanwhile, Back At The Ranch

While much of America was focused on the hearings in Washington, censorship of ideas or events that were contradictory to the ruling political class continued. Yesterday NewsMax reported that Twitter had suspended the accounts of anyone seeking to audit 2020 presidential election results. What are they afraid of? Obviously the hearings in Washington are a good distraction from various audits taking place around the country.

The article reports:

Twitter, assailed by some critics as hostile to conservative voices, has apparently imposed a ban on those seeking to audit 2020 presidential election results, including some involved in the first-of-its-kind forensic audit in Maricopa County, Arizona.

Reports first noted the banning of two accounts sharing information from the Arizona forensic audit, but accounts sharing information on audit intentions in other states were suspended by Twitter on Tuesday afternoon, according to multiple reports.

Arizona state Sen. Wendy Rogers tweeted the news and warned followers she might be a future victim of Big Tech censorship

…The accounts included those designed to inform about the Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Pennsylvania audits, too. Those are among the states that decided the election for President Joe Biden and the bans come on the day House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Jan. 6 Select Committee began hearing from law enforcement officers who were beaten during the storming of the Capitol.

The article notes that Project Veritas has also been banned from Twitter. It really is time for someone to start a social media platform that can compete with Twitter and will allow all points of view.

Behind The Scenes At Big Tech

I received this video in my email this morning from Project Veritas.

The email also noted the following highlights from the video:

  • Vijaya Gadde, Twitter Legal, Policy and Trust & Safety Lead: “One of the interesting things is a lot of the work that we’ve been doing over the last week is work that we’ve built on in other places around the world, where we’ve seen violence unfold as a result of either misleading information or coded rhetoric.”
  • Gadde: “A lot of our learnings here [in the United States] have come from other markets. So, in that sense, you know, we do feel like it is – this is our global approach.
  • Gadde: “We need to be very focused on being able to enforce any of these policies or enforcement decisions we make at scale.”
  • Gadde: “We decided to escalate our enforcement of the civic integrity policy and use a label that disabled engagements to stop the spread of potentially inflammatory content, which is the content around election interference, election fraud, stealing the election, that type of thing.”
  • Gadde: “We think that the severity of what’s happening on the ground, coupled with the information that’s contained in these [election fraud] tweets — misleading information about the election being stolen and massive fraud around the election are what is changing our analysis of how we should enforce this [civic integrity] policy. It [election fraud tweets] is a much more severe violation given what we were seeing on the ground.”
  • Gadde: “We’re going to actually be more aggressive in our enforcement beyond de-amplification.”

This kind of thinking does not fit the paradigm of a free society.

 

The Role Of The Media In The 2020 Presidential Election

Yesterday The Washington Times (the link is to the article posted on outline, as I don’t have a subscription to The Washington Times) posted an article about the role of the media in the 2020 Presidential election.

The article reports:

A new post-election poll conducted by the Media Research Center reveals that 36% of voters who chose presumptive President-elect Joseph R. Biden were not aware of the evidence linking him “to corrupt financial dealings with China through his son Hunter Biden,” noted an analysis of the findings released Monday.

“Thirteen percent of these voters (or 4.6% of Biden’s total vote) say that had they known these facts, they would not have voted for the former Vice President. Such a shift away from Biden would have meant President Trump would have won the election with 289 electoral votes,” the conservative press watchdog noted.

The greater implication: Press coverage was at fault.

“It is an indisputable fact that the media stole the election. The American electorate was intentionally kept in the dark. During the height of the scandal surrounding Hunter Biden’s foreign dealings, the media and the big tech companies did everything in their power to cover it up. Twitter and Facebook limited sharing of the New York Post’s reports, and the liberal media omitted it from their coverage or dismissed it as Russian disinformation,” says Brent Bozell, founder of the center.

Remember that The New York Post was shut out of Twitter for posting an article about Hunter Biden’s business dealings. Any articles dealing with Biden family corruption are immediately fact-checked by Facebook. My right wing granny group on Facebook has been charged with sharing false information (anyone can join, please do). There is a mass exodus from Facebook right now. I am not sure how permanent it will be. As much as it is nice to communicate with old friends, it is not so nice to be brainwashed. Actions have consequences, and Facebook may be facing those consequences.